From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
Cc: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: How much work is a native Windows application? |
Date: | 2002-05-08 04:49:27 |
Message-ID: | 29206.1020833367@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, 7 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It'd be worth trying to understand cygwin issues in detail before we
>> sign up to do and support a native Windows port.
> Actually, there are licensing issues involved ... we could never put a
> 'windows binary' up for anon-ftp, since to distribute it would require the
> cygwin.dll to be distributed, and to do that, there is a licensing cost
> ... of course, I guess we could require ppl to download cygwin seperately,
> install that, then install the binary over top of that ...
<<itch>> And how much development time are we supposed to expend to
avoid that?
Give me a technical case for avoiding Cygwin, and maybe I can get
excited about it. I'm not planning to lift a finger on the basis
of licensing though... after all, Windows users are accustomed to
paying for software, no?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-05-08 05:08:59 | Re: How much work is a native Windows application? |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2002-05-08 04:34:55 | SRF patch (was Re: [HACKERS] Set Returning Functions (SRF) - request for patch review and comment) |